Obama opens up on Rezko, and it's almost believable

Obama spoke at length about wanting to emerge clean from the cesspool of Chicago politics. He also spoke about his controversial pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose racially charged and radically anti-American comments Obama denounced without denouncing the man. There will be more to say on Wright and liberal media guilt and tortured Democratic formulations of race and gender in future days.

But I was focused on Obama and Rezko. I wanted to believe Obama, and almost did.

Afterward, we joked about smoking cigarettes together after the election -- and promised not to tell our wives, since we've both quit.

If he is elected, he can smoke whenever, like a grown-up, even in the Oval Office, and I'd even lie to Congress about his smoking, just as long as President Obama keeps his mouth shut about me.

Later, when the people from other floors weren't hanging in the halls like Bono groupies at a U2 concert, I was left alone with a problem: Obama asks us to believe he can swim in the sewers of Illinois politics without catching a cold. He tells us that Rezko helped him scope out his dream house, yet Obama never thought he'd get a call from Tony saying his back was itchy.

"No," Obama said. "Because I had known him for a long time, and so I would have assumed I would have seen a pattern over the course of 15 years."

I'm too old to believe in fairy tales.

Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake

November 5, 2006
BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND CHRIS FUSCO Staff Reporters Contributing: Mark Brown

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko in a deal that enlarged the senator's yard.

"I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it," Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an exclusive and revealing question-and-answer exchange about the transaction.

In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood. The state's junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot. Both closed on their properties on the same day.


The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves from him.

In the Sun-Times interview, Obama acknowledged approaching Rezko about the two properties being up for sale and that Rezko developed an immediate interest. Obama did not explain why he reached out to Rezko given the developer's growing problems.

Last month, Rezko was indicted for his role in an alleged pay-to-play scheme designed to fatten Gov. Blagojevich's political fund. Rezko also was accused of bilking a creditor.

"With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that everything was handled ethically and above board. But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko," Obama said.

"It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor," the senator said.

The land deal came up in a court hearing Friday that delved into Rezko's finances. Obama said he has not been approached by federal prosecutors about the transaction nor has plans to go to them about it.

Obama and Rezko have been friends since 1990, and Obama said the Wilmette businessman raised as much as $60,000 for him during his political career. After Rezko's indictment, Obama donated $11,500 to charity--a total that represents what Rezko contributed to the senator's federal campaign fund.

After the controversy surfaced on Wednesday, the Sun-Times presented Obama's office with a lengthy set of questions about the land deal, Obama's relationship with Rezko and the story's impact on a potential 2008 bid for the White House.

Here are his responses:

Q: Senator, when did you first meet Tony Rezko? How did you become friends? How often would you meet with him, and when did you last speak with him?

A: I had attracted some media attention when I was elected the first black President of the Harvard Law Review. And while I was in law school, David Brint, who was a development partner with Tony Rezko contacted me and asked whether I would be interested in being a developer. Ultimately, after discussions in which I met Mr. Rezko, I said no.

I have probably had lunch with Rezko once or twice a year and our spouses may have gotten together on two to four occasions in the time that I have known him. I last spoke with Tony Rezko more than six months ago.

Q:. Have you or your wife participated in any other transactions of any kind with Rezko or companies he owns? Have you or your wife ever done any legal work ever for Rezko or his companies?

A: No.

Q: Has Rezko ever given you or your family members gifts of any kind and, if so, what were they?

A: No.

Q: The seller of your house appears to be a doctor at the University of Chicago . Do you or your wife know him? If so, did either of you ever talk to him about subdividing the property? If you ever did discuss the property with him, when were those conversations?

A: We did not know him personally, though my wife worked in the same University hospital. The property was subdivided and two lots were separately listed when we first learned of it. We did not discuss the property with the owners; the sale was negotiated for us by our agent.

Q: Did you approach Rezko or his wife about the property, or did they approach you?

A: To the best of my recollection, I told him about the property, and he developed an interest, knowing both the location and, as I recall, the developer who had previously purchased it.

Q: Who was your Realtor? Did this Realtor also represent Rita Rezko?

A: Miriam Zeltzerman, who had also represented me in the purchase of my prior property, a condominium, in Hyde Park. She did not represent Rita Rezko.

Q: How do you explain the fact your family purchased your home the same day as Rita Rezko bought the property adjacent to yours? Was this a coordinated purchase?

A: The sellers required the closing of both properties at the same time. As they were moving out of town, they wished to conclude the sale of both properties simultaneously. The lot was purchased first; with the purchase of the house on the adjacent lot, the closings could proceed and did, on the same day, pursuant to the condition set by the sellers.

Q: Why is it that you were able to buy your parcel for $300,000 less than the asking price, and Rita Rezko paid full price? Who negotiated this end of the deal? Did whoever negotiated it have any contact with Rita and Tony Rezko or their Realtor or lawyer?

A: Our agent negotiated only with the seller's agent. As we understood it, the house had been listed for some time, for months, and our offer was one of two and, as we understood it, it was the best offer. The original listed price was too high for the market at the time, and we understood that the sellers, who were anxious to move, were prepared to sell the house for what they paid for it, which is what they did.

We were not involved in the Rezko negotiation of the price for the adjacent lot. It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less.

Q: Why did you put the property in a trust?

A: I was advised that a trust holding would afford me some privacy, which was important to me as I would be commuting from Washington to Chicago and my family would spend some part of most weeks without me.

Q: A Nov. 21, 1999, Chicago Tribune story indicates the house you bought "sits on a quarter-acre lot and will share a driveway and entrance gate with a home next door that has not yet been built." Is this shared driveway still in the mix? Will this require further negotiations with the Rezkos?

A: The driveway is not shared with the adjacent owner. But the resident in the carriage house in the back does have an easement over it.

Q: Does it display a lack of judgment on your part to be engaging in real estate deals with Tony Rezko at a point his connections to state government had been reported to be under federal investigation?

A: I've always held myself to the highest ethical standards. During the ten years I have been in public office, I believe I have met those standards and I know that is what people expect of me. I have also understood the importance of appearances.

With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that everything was handled ethically and above board.

But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko. It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.

Throughout my life, I have put faith in confronting experiences honestly and learning from them. And that is what I will do with this experience as well.

Q: Why did you not publicly disclose the transaction after Rezko got indicted?

A: At the time, it didn't strike me as relevant. I did however donate campaign contributions from Rezko to charity.

Q: Have you been interviewed by federal investigators about this transaction or about your relationship with Rezko? If not, do you intend to approach them?

A: I have not been interviewed by federal investigators. I have no reason to approach them.

Q: Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever discuss casino matters with you?

A: No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business interests. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony Rezko were interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation. (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/srollcalls91/pdf/910SB1017_05251999_001000C.PDF)

Q: Has this disclosure about your relationship with Rezko changed your thoughts about a White House run?

A: No. As I have said, how I can best serve is something I will think about after the 2006 election next Tuesday.

Q: Did Rezko ever discuss with you his dealings with Stuart Levine, Christopher Kelly or William Cellini or the role he was playing in shaping Gov. Blagojevich's administration?

A: No.

Q: Are the Obamas the only beneficiaries of the land trust?

A: Yes.

Q: Are you aware of any efforts by previous owners to develop what is now the Rezko lot, possibly as townhomes?

A: I was not aware of any prior effort by the seller to develop the property, but always understood the other lot was to be developed upon sale.

Q: Did Rezko have an appraisal performed for the 10-foot strip?

A: I had an appraisal conducted by Howard B. Richter & Associates on November 21, 2005.

Q: Was there a negotiation? Did he have an asking price, or did he just say, whatever you think is fair?

A: I proposed to pay on the basis of proportionality. Since the strip composed one-sixth of the entire lot, I would pay one-sixth of the purchase price of the lot. I offered this to Mr. Rezko and he accepted it.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article
In defense of the locals

Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008

* We’ve been hearing for weeks from the national punditry that Barack Obama hasn’t been fully vetted by the media. I think that’s mostly wrong, and I angrily told that to a national reporter who called me last week.

Will something else come out about Obama? Could be. One never knows what might get mentioned at Tony Rezko’s trial, for instance.

But the Tribune explains today what they dug through to get at any connections between the law firm Obama worked for and Rezko…

At the Tribune’s request, Cook County Circuit Court Chief Judge Timothy Evans produced a list of all 260 civil and criminal cases in which the firm filed appearances, and the Tribune separately examined 1990s lawsuits that Rezmar Corp. listed in applications for government grants. The paper also examined files from the Illinois Housing Development Authority and the city housing department, as well as the hundreds of clients Obama listed in the unusually frank ethics disclosure reports he filed as a state senator from December 1995 through April 2004.

The scouring turned out mostly to be a dud. Still, it was a heckuva lot of work.

* That doesn’t include all the other stuff the Tribune has done, like this…

The Tribune analyzed 119 grants in which Obama steered more than $6 million for Chicago projects between late 1999 and late 2002, the heart of his Statehouse career and the center of a state government frenzy in which Obama said the pork-barrel process was “wide open.”

* The Trib has also filed dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests on Obama, sources say, and they combed through Obama’s list of nearly 100 interns to find one connected to Rezko. And, of course, it was the Tribune which figured out that Rezko had bought the lot next door to Obama’s house.

* The Sun-Times has been doing a lot of work, too, like this piece which tracked down a bunch of people who attended a long-ago Obama fundraiser hosted by Rezko.

* The CS-T also dug into something I wouldn’t even dream of doing…

A Sun-Times review of student evaluations from Obama’s 10 years of teaching part-time at the University of Chicago Law School shows that students almost always rated Obama as one of their top instructors — except for one quarter in 1997.

That’s pretty deep, if you ask me.

They also found a photo of Obama and Rezko today that I don’t ever remember seeing.

* And then there’s all the leftover Blair Hull opposition research that’s found its way into the Clinton campaign via her assistant campaign manager Mike Henry, who ran Hull’s disastrous 2004 primary against Obama. One of Hull’s sharpest criticisms of Obama was his “Present” votes in the state Senate, so it’s no surprise that Clinton is now using it, too. Sun-Times’ Lynn Sweet made the connection…

Henry, back in 2004, when he was working for Hull, orchestrated a series of mailings to Illinois voters which referenced the Obama present votes on abortion with a picture of a duck and “He ducked” in the headline. The mailings came out just before the March, 2004 Illinois primary so they would be hard to rebut.

Sweet has been following Obama around for months, tracking his every move. Nobody has more intense coverage of Obama’s campaign than Sweet.

* Again, something more may be found. The Tribune and the Sun-Times might possibly still be working on stories. There may be a “silver bullet” in Hull’s old OR that hasn’t been used yet (I doubt it, however).

But for the national types to claim that Obama’s past is mostly unknown is just a total crock. All they have to do is comb through the Tribune and CS-T’s archives, or try the Google. A lot of very hard work has already been done, and is still being done today. Too many reporters based in DC, or NY, or LA think that all there is to know is in their own publications. Not so.

I often criticize the media, but in this instance I’d like to take my hat off to the locals who have really done a bang-up job on this Obama thing.

- posted by Rich Miller
http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2008/01/23/in-defense-of-the-locals/

http://illinoisreason.wordpress.com/2008/01/23/illinois-blogs-recap-rezko-obama-not-much-there-there/
Illinois Blogs Recap Rezko & Obama: Not Much There There, UPDATED

January 23, 2008 in Obama by robnesvacil

Tags: Barack Obama, President 2008, Tony Rezko

Two Illinois poliblog institutions, The Capitol Fax Blog (by political journalist Rich Miller) and ArchPundit (by political blogger Larry Handlin), are producing primers for the American people and the self-proclaimed media of record (not that the “national” media feels a need to be bothered with actual details when there’s a good soap opera to splash some ink on).

For those interested in learning just what Sen. Barack Obama’s not-very-much-of-a-relationship with Chicago developer Tony Rezko is, read up…

CapFax’s In defense of the locals reviews the Illinois political media’s coverage of Sen. Obama and attempts by the Tribune, Sun-Times, etc. to find skeletons in his closet over the years. Of note: the Chicago Tribune discovered two instances of what might be of interest to those hoping to turn Tony Rezko into Obama’s Marc Rich or Norman Hsu.

First, the Trib uncovered the property purchase in which the Obama family bought a home and Mr. Rezko’s wife bought an adjoining piece of property from the same seller on the same day. Sen. Obama has apologized for this event and acknowledged how, from the outside looking in, it appears unseemly even though everything was done legally and legitimately.

Second, the Trib also found that Sen. Obama’s staff gave an internship to a kid whose father was connected to Rezko and who had donated money to Obama’s previous campaigns. Ummm… ok.

Mr. Miller also writes that the Trib explained the research they did to investigate the connections between the law firm Sen. Obama used to work for and Rezko. Would that more media would bother to actually “work” a story as the Chicago papers have with regards to any sort of ties between Obama and Rezko (and most, if not all, of those ties seem to be perfectly legit based on that rather exhaustive research).

In his post, Mr. Miller also notes that an oppo-research consultant from one of Sen. Obama’s US Senate primary opponents, Mike Henry, was hired by the Clinton campaign and that since his hiring Clinton’s attacks have mirrored the earlier attacks from that 2004 primary opponent. Go figure.

UPDATE: Rich Miller has posted a follow-up today in “Present votes and Rezko“.

ArchPundit also currently has a series of five eight “Rezko primers” up on his blog (don’t know if he’ll add more so check his site for the latest UPDATE: Arch did add a few more and has a summary/linky post on all eight in “The Rezko Primer“). His posts’ titles are rather self-explanatory:

* Rezko Primer I: Job Offer and Friendship Begins
* Rezko Primer II: Political Donations
* Rezko Primer III. Legal work on projects Rezko was involved
* Rezko Primer IV. Letters of Support for projects Rezko was involved
* Rezko Primer V. Intern-son of Rezko ally/Obama donor
* New: VI. House Purchase
* New: VII. Land Strip Purchase from Rezko
* New: VIII. Landscaping and Property Maintenance Arrangement

Don’t get me wrong. Rezko is going to court after having been accused of some pretty serious white collar crimes. If convicted he ought to pay his debt to society.

But guilt by association witch hunts are damn weak — just ask the Clintons their thoughts on Kenneth Starr and his investigation of the, ahem, Whitewater Land Deal… — even if the national media is willing to lazily regurgitate an opponent’s spin on their front pages and TV news crawlers.

If some sort of quid pro quo had ever surfaced there’d be something to talk about but as it stands there’s really no there “there” between Rezko and Obama. No one has ever found any instance of Obama doing anything as a legislator that would have illegally (or even unethically) benefited Rezko. (That said, journalist Miller correctly notes that something about Obama may yet surface during Rezko’s trial but given the boxes of files the Illinois media has analyzed it seems unlikely.)

Present’ Perfect
By ABNER J. MIKVA
Published: February 16, 2008

SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON should probably be forgiven for not remembering the course on the state Constitution that she would have had to take as an eighth grader in Illinois. But had she remembered it, she would have known that Senator Barack Obama was not ducking his responsibility in the Illinois Senate when he voted “present” on many issues.

Unlike Congress and the legislatures of most other states, each chamber of the Illinois Legislature requires a “constitutional majority” to pass a bill. The state Senate has 59 members, so it takes 30 affirmative votes. This makes a “present” vote the same as a no. If a bill receives 29 votes, but the rest of the senators vote “present,” it fails.
------------------------------------
In the Illinois Senate, there can be strategic reasons for voting “present” rather than simply no. A member might approve the intent of legislation, but not its scope or the way it has been drafted. A “present” vote can send a signal to a bill’s sponsors that the legislator might support an amended version. Voting “present” can also be a way to exercise fiscal restraint, without opposing the subject of the bill.
----------------------------------------------
It never occurred to me or to any of my critics that I was ducking responsibility for a making a decision. Mr. Obama was an outspoken member of the Illinois Senate, and not someone known for dodging questions, whether they were on ethics, police responsibility, women’s choice or any other hot-button issue.

Even if Senator Clinton does not remember the constitutional majority requirement in Illinois, one of her advisers might have explained it to her. When I was White House counsel, President Clinton frequently reminded me that he had taught constitutional law before he ran for public office. I would hope that he would assume that another constitutional scholar — Barack Obama — would be aware of his voting responsibilities as a state legislator.

Abner J. Mikva has been an Illinois state legislator, a United States congressman, a federal judge and, from 1994 to 1995, White House counsel. He now directs the Mandel Legal Aid Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School. Mr. Mikva serves as an informal adviser to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/opinion/16mikva.html?ex=1360818000&en=9417ee6115534086&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Friday, January 25, 2008
'Present' votes defended by Ill. lawmakers
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline.org Staff Writer

In most legislatures, lawmakers vote either “yes” or “no” on bills, but in Illinois, senators and representatives can hit a third button for a “present” vote. Now that quirk — not unique to Illinois — has sparked heated exchanges among Democrats vying for president.

The two main rivals of Illinois’ U.S. Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination accused him during a debate Monday (Jan. 21) of ducking important votes by voting “present” about 130 times during his eight years in the Illinois Senate.

But Obama’s former colleagues who still serve in the Illinois Capitol say that the attacks are off-base and that either Obama’s opponents don’t understand how things work in Springfield or they are deliberately distorting his record.
-------------------------------------
“The ‘present’ vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue,” said state Rep. John Fritchey (D), an Obama supporter.
------------------------------
In Illinois, the “present” vote works as a vote against a measure during final action.

State Sen. John Cullerton (D) calls the “present” vote “a no vote with an explanation.” Legally, there’s not much difference between the two votes, but practically, it can let the sponsors or other legislators know of problems with the bill that should be corrected.

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=274863

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama's fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses.

The money transfer raises the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain’s wealthiest men, helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago.

A company related to Mr Auchi, who has a conviction for corruption in France, registered the loan to Mr Obama's bagman Antoin "Tony" Rezko on May 23 2005. Mr Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million.

Mr Obama says he never used Mrs Rezko's still-empty lot, which could only be accessed through his property. But he admits he paid his gardener to mow the lawn.